| Historical notes: | Aboriginal land
The Upper Canal covers a large tract of Country. In its northern half, the original inhabitants and custodians were the Dharug or Dharuk people of the Eora nation. In its southern half, the original inhabitants of the Campbelltown area were mostly people of the Tharawal (sometimes referred to as Dharawal) language group, who ranged from the coast to the east, the Georges River in the west, north to Botany Bay and south to Nowra. However, Campbelltown was a meeting point with the Dharug language group (whose area extended across the Blue Mountains) and early history of the area includes references to both peoples (Liston, 1988; www.abc.net.au/indigenous).
The Dharawal extended widely across their lands, following the seasonal availability of foods and trading with neighbouring clans. The Georges River and its tributaries provided water, food and shelter, and the area's sandstone overhangs and platforms provided places for paintings and engravings.
This area was the traditional land of the Gandangara people (Garran ,1978, 530). The area is home to the Tharawal and Gundungurra people (Robinson, 2008).
Gundungurra or Gandangarra people lived in the Southern Highlands area, which includes Mittagong, for many thousands of years. People who spoke the Gundungurra language lived in the Blue Mountains, the Southern Highlands and the Goulburn Plains of New South Wales. They lived in small groups of extended family members, who were attached to particular areas of country (Di Johnson: 2004 in SHR database 5045486).
Gundungurra groups left archaeological evidence of their occupation throughout their traditional lands, including scarred trees where bark was removed for use as a boat or other object, grinding grooves on rocks where axes were ground, and occupation sites which include middens. Well-worn Gundungurra pathways on ridge tops were often the routes used as the first roads by colonists (Di Johnson 2004). Possibly this could have been the origin of the Old South Road... (SHR database 5045486).
One of the first places in the Gundungurra traditional homelands that most appealed to the Anglo-Celt settlers were the river flats of the Burragorang Valley (now flooded under Warragamba Dam). Even before the valley was officially surveyed in 1827-8, many early settlers were already squatting on blocks that they planned to officially occupy following the issue of freehold title grants. From the Burragorang Valley and using Aboriginal pathways, other valleys to the west were occupied and developed by the settlers with construction of outstations and stock routes. These cattle entrepreneurs were then followed by cedar-wood extractors and miners (Johnson, 2009, 4).
After Anglo-European settlers caused displacement of Gundungurra people, they often worked on farms or grazing properties within and adjacent to their traditional land (Di Johnson: 2004 in SHR database 5045486).
The Gundungurra traditional owners resisted the taking of their lands, and, relying on various laws of the colony at the time, continually applied for official ownership. Although their individual claims failed, in some kind of recognition of the significance of the designated tracts of land claimed, six Aboriginal Reserves (under the control of the NSW Aborigines Protection Board) were formally declared in the Burragorang Valley. Even after these reserves were revoked, many of the traditional owners remained, quietly refusing to leave their traditional homelands (ibid, 2009, 4).
Finally pushed into the 'Gully', a fringe development in West Katoomba from about 1894, the Gully community stayed together for over 60 years until dispossessed by the then Blue Mountains Shire Council, so a group of local businessmen could develop a speedway that became known as the Catalina Race Track. The Gully people kept talking about areas of land they had walked in as children - the nearby Megalong and Kanimbla Valleys and the Burragorang Valley. They knew of the profound significance of these valleys for their parents and grandparents (ibid, 2009, 4).
Camden & the Cow Pastures:
The area is associated with the early history of the colony of New South Wales. With establishment of the convict colony in Sydney in 1788, displacement of Aboriginal people began. A smallpox epidemic decimated many of the coastal clans, but it was less destructive amongst the inland peoples. Escaped cattle from the convict settlement moved south and bred in the Campbelltown/Camden area and after their (re-) discovery here in 1795, Governor Hunter named the area 'The Cowpastures' (or Cowpasture). Governor Hunter named the area 'The Cowpastures' after cattle which had strayed from the Farm Cove settlement were discovered there in 1795. Due to the early European settlers, namely the Macarthurs, who established flourishing wool, wine and wheat industries here, the area is said to be 'the birthplace of the nation's wealth' (ibid, 2008).
European incursions into the Cowpastures commenced thereafter. This encroachment took both legal and illegal forms and involved escaped convicts (including cattle rustlers and bush rangers) and stationed government representatives (Tuck, 2003; quoted in Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologist, 2014, 9).
In 1805 John Macarthur obtained a grant of 5000 acres (later expanded to 10,000) at Camden Park in the Camden area, some of the best grazing land then known in the colony.
Due to the early European settlers, namely the Macarthurs, who established flourishing wool, wine and wheat industries here, the area is said to be 'the birthplace of the nation's wealth' (ibid, 2008).
Appin is the oldest urban settlement in the Wollondilly Shire (WSC, 2017). Its name came about, despite that most local settlers came from Irish stock, due to Governor Macquarie's arrival in the colony in 1810. At the time, Government House was in Parramatta and one of Macquarie's first intentions was to travel into the nearby country to discover the best land from which the colony could be provided with food. It was already known that the most productive area for that purpose was the Hawkesbury River country, but these districts had proven precarious because of severe flooding which caused great losses in crops and stock (Percival, 1992, 7).
The land Macquarie intended to study lay between the Nepean and Georges Rivers. There had been no identification of the land which ran as far south as the Cataract River and was bounded on the west by the Nepean and the east by the Georges Rivers. On completion of his survey, this area reminded him so much of his own (home) district in Scotland that he called it Airds district. Some time later he named the section south, including Mount Gilead, Appin (Percival, 1992, 7).
Macquarie gave many grants in order to develop the land. The first was 1000 acres to Sydney magistrate and acting commissary-general, William Broughton. There were several others of smaller amounts, made on condition that after five years, unless sufficient progress had been made in cropping and stocking, the land would revert to the Crown. The district became a great supplier of wheat, corn and barley, carried to Sydney by wagons pulled by teams of bullocks or horses (Percival, 1992, 8). Another 22 grants were provisioned between 1815 and 1816, including Broughton's 'Macquarie Dale' (700 acres)(Mary Dallas Consulting Archaeologist, 2014, 11).
here were several other grants of smaller amounts, made on condition that after five years, unless sufficient progress had been made in cropping and stocking, the land would revert back to the Crown. The district became a great supplier of wheat, corn and barley, carried to Sydney by wagons pulled by teams of bullocks or horses (Percival, 1992, 8)
Prospect Hill, Prospect and Prospect Reservoir area (Cumberland and Blacktown local government areas):
The area of Prospect Reservoir is of known Aboriginal occupation, with favourable camping locations along the Eastern Creek and Prospect Creek catchments, and in elevated landscapes to the south. There is also evidence to suggest that the occupation of these lands continued after European contact, through discovery of intermingled glass and stone flakes in archaeological surveys of the place. The area was settled by Europeans by 1789.
Prospect Hill, Sydney's largest body of igneous rock, lies centrally in the Cumberland Plain and dominates the landscape of the area (Ashton, 2000). Very early after first settlement, on 26 April 1788, an exploration party heading west led by Governor Phillip, climbed Prospect Hill. An account by Phillip states that the exploration party saw from Prospect Hill, 'for the first time since we landed Carmathen Hills (Blue Mountains) as likewise the hills to the southward'. Phillip's 'Bellevue' (Prospect Hill) acquired considerable significance for the new settlers. Prospect Hill provided a point from which distances could be meaningfully calculated, and became a major reference point for other early explorers (Karskens 1991). When Watkin Tench made another official journey to the west in 1789, he began his journey with reference to Prospect Hill, which commanded a view of the great chain of mountains to the west. A runaway convict, George Bruce, used Prospect Hill as a hideaway from soldiers in the mid-1790s.
During the initial struggling years of European settlement in NSW, Governor Phillip began to settle time-expired convicts on the land as farmers, after the success of James Ruse at Rose Hill (Higginbotham 2000). On 18 July 1791 Phillip placed a number of men on the eastern and southern slopes of Prospect Hill, as the soils weathered from the basalt cap were richer than the sandstone derived soils of the Cumberland Plain. The grants, mostly 30 acres, encircled Prospect Hill (Ashton 2000). The settlers included William Butler, James Castle, Samuel Griffiths, John Herbert, George Lisk, Joseph Morley, John Nicols, William Parish and Edward Pugh (Higginbotham 2000).
The arrival of the first settlers prompted the first organised Aboriginal resistance to the spread of settlement, with the commencement of a violent frontier conflict in which Pemulwuy and his Bidjigal clan played a central role (Flynn 1997). On 1 May 1801 Governor King took drastic action, issuing a public order requiring that Aboriginal people around Parramatta, Prospect Hill and Georges River should be 'driven back from the settlers' habitations by firing at them'. Kings edicts appear to have encouraged a shoot-on-sight attitude whenever any Aboriginal men, women or children appeared (Flynn 1997).
With the death of Pemulwuy, the main resistance leader, in 1802, Aboriginal resistance gradually diminished near Parramatta, although outer areas were still subject to armed hostilities. Prompted by suggestions to the Reverend Marsden by local Prospect Aboriginal groups that a conference should take place 'with a view of opening the way to reconciliation', Marsden promptly organised a meeting near Prospect Hill. (ibid 1997). At the meeting, held on 3 May 1805, local Aboriginal representatives discussed with Marsden ways of ending the restrictions and indiscriminate reprisals inflicted on them by soldiers and settlers in response to atrocities committed by other Aboriginal clans (ibid 1997). The meeting was significant because a group of Aboriginal women and a young free settler at Prospect named John Kennedy acted as intermediaries. The conference led to the end of the conflict for the Aboriginal clans around Parramatta and Prospect (Karskens 1991). This conference at Prospect on Friday 3 May 1805 is a landmark in Aboriginal/European relations. Macquarie's 'Native Feasts' held at Parramatta from 1814 followed the precedent set in 1805. The Sydney Gazette report of the meeting is notable for the absence of the sneering tone that characterised its earlier coverage of Aboriginal matters (ibid 1997).
From its commencement in 1791 with the early settlement of the area, agricultural use of the land continued at Prospect Hill. Much of the land appears to have been cleared by the 1820s and pastoral use of the land was well established by then. When Governor Macquarie paid a visit to the area in 1810, he was favourably impressed by the comfortable conditions that had been created (Pollon & Healy, 1988, 210).
Nelson Lawson, third son of explorer William Lawson (1774-1850), married Honoria Mary Dickinson and before 1837 built "Greystanes House" as their future family home on the western side of Prospect Hill. Lawson had received the land from his father, who had been granted 500 acres here by the illegal government that followed the overthrow of Governor Bligh in 1808.
Governor Macquarie confirmed the grant, where William Lawson had built a house, which he called "Veteran Hall", because he had a commission in the NSW Veterans Company. The house was demolished in 1928 and the site is now partly covered by the waters of Prospect Reservoir. Greystanes was approached by a long drive lined with an avenue of English trees - elms (Ulmus procera), hawthorns (Crataegus sp.), holly (Ilex aquifolium), and woodbine (Clematis sp.) mingling with jacarandas (J.mimosifolia). It had a wide, semi-circular front verandah supported by 4 pillars. The foundations were of stone ,the roof of slate, and the doors and architraves of heavy red cedar. It was richly furnished with articles of the best quality available and was the scene of many glittering soirees attended by the elite of the colony. Honoria Lawson died in 1845, Nelson remarried a year later, but died in 1849, and the property reverted to his father. Greystanes house was demolished in the 1940s (Pollon, 1988, 116, amended Read, S.,2006 - the house can't have been 'on the crest' of Prospect Hill as Pollon states, if its site was covered by the Reservoir).
By the 1870s, with the collapse of the production of cereal grains across the Cumberland Plain, the Prospect Hill area appears to have largely been devoted to livestock. The dwellings of the earliest settlers largely appear to have been removed by this stage. By the time that any mapping was undertaken in this vicinity, most of these structures had disappeared, making their locations difficult to pinpoint (Higginbotham 2000).
The land was farmed from 1806-1888 when the Prospect Reservoir was built. In 1867, the Governor of NSW appointed a Commission to recommend a scheme for Sydney's water supply, and by 1869 it was recommended that construction commence on the Upper Nepean Scheme.
Upper Canal System:
By 1869 it was recommended that construction commence on the Upper Nepean Scheme. This consisted of two diversion weirs, located at Pheasant's Nest and Broughton's Pass, in the Upper Nepean River catchment, with water feeding into a series of tunnels, canals and aqueducts known as the Upper Canal. It was intended that water be fed by gravity from the catchment into a reservoir at Prospect. This scheme was to be Sydney's fourth water supply system, following the Tank Stream, Busby's Bore and the Botany (Lachlan) Swamps.
Designed and constructed by the Public Works Department of NSW, Prospect Reservoir was built during the 1880s and completed in 1888. Credit for the Upper Nepean Scheme is largely given to Edward Orpen Moriarty, the Engineer in Chief of the Harbours and Rivers Branch of the Public Works Department from 1858-88 (B Cubed Sustainability, 2005, 7).
The Upper Canal System is an integral element of the Upper Nepean Scheme which collects water from the four major dams on Cataract, Cordeaux, Nepean and Avon Rivers. The 64km long Upper Canal is the man-made section of the Scheme between Pheasant's Nest Weir and Prospect Reservoir and still operates as a gravity supply.
The Scheme delivered its first water in January 1886 and functioned until (GAO, 2018, 23) the Upper Nepean Scheme was fully-commissioned into use in 1888, along with Prospect Reservoir. The Canal was built using a variety of materials and structure types to suit the nature of the countryside through which it was passing. Above ground the water was channelled in open canal sections. Where the ground was soft the Canal was V-shaped and lined with shale or sandstone. In other sections, it was U-shaped and lined with sandstone masonry or left unlined where the Canal cut through solid rock. Where the water had to pass through hills or rises, tunnels were excavated and left unlined where they passed through rock and lined with brick where they cut through softer material. Over creeks and other deep depressions, the water moved through wrought iron aqueducts.
Other original design features included: stop boards to allow sections of the Canal to be closed for cleaning and repair; flumes to ensure that stormwater from surrounding lands did not enter the Canal to pollute; bridges to carry major roads; and 'occupation bridges' to allow access for property owners.
Throughout the late-19th and early 20th century the water supply through the Upper Nepean Scheme was managed by a resident engineer who lived on site in various locations over time including Prospect Reservoir, Potts Hill and Pipe head. Maintenance men and inspectors were living along the Canal housed in cottages owned by the Water Board. There were also valve controllers living at the weirs at the southern end and Prospect Reservoir in the north, to regulate the discharge of water along the Scheme. Most of these houses have been demolished, but the sites of some remain in archaeological form (GAO, 2018, 24).
Day-to-day communications between workers were enabled by a telephone line along the Canal's length, which was in operation by 1898. Some of the original poles from this line still exist within the Canal corridor. Movement along the Canal was assisted by roads or tracks alongside, which were gradually added from the mid-to late 1890s. In some areas access was difficult until 1935 when the larger creek crossings were bridged (ibid, 2018, 24).
Larger scale repairs and maintenance were usually scheduled during winter, when lower demand for water allowed sections of Canal to be de-watered. By the 1900s this included relining some lengths of open canal. In the early 20th century the demand on the scheme increased with Sydney's increasing population. In 1902 a Royal Commission was established to make a full inquiry into Sydney's water supply. This considered a range of matters across the supply network including the Upper Canal. Although its initial recommendations were to undertake major works to the Nepean Tunnel, only minor work was required to bring the Upper Canal's capacity to its current 150 million gallon per day capacity. This included improving flow characteristics by concreting rough spots on the bottom and sides of the canal and tunnels and replacing some of the stone pitching with concrete. By-passes were also provided around the wrought iron aqueducts to enable their internal maintenance (ibid, 2018, 25).
A 54" diameter woodstave main was built from the Upper Canal at the 39 mile point to take water directly to Pipe Head basin. In 1937 it was replaced with permanent 72" diameter steel main between the Upper Canal at Prospect Reservoir and Pipe Head (Guildford). In 1958 when water from Warragamba (Dam) became available an 84" diameter steel pipeline was commissioned. The 1920s and 30s also saw construction of a range of new over-bridges and flumes, improving access and water quality. Another phase of bridge and flume upgrades occurred in the 1970s and 80s. The cottages occupied by maintenance staff along the Canal appear to have passed out of use at this time (ibid, 2018, 26).
In the 2000s all of the trash racks at the tunnel and aqueduct portals were replaced and new safety railing installed at various points along the Canal system to ensure safer working conditions for operational staff. This period also saw a range of works to prevent or rectify impacts of coal mining subsidence including propping and re-lining of aqueducts, propping and repairs to collapsed or unstable sections of open canal and temporary raising of the freeboard (ibid, 2018, 26). |